Search

This whole contraception debate has gotten completely out of hand. In light of the Obama Administration’s decision regarding birth control access for women employed by Catholic organizations, Catholic’s have been kicking and scream about Freedom of Religion. It seems that their main argument is that by forcing Catholic organizations to provide insurance that has the option of covering birth control for women who want it violates their religious beliefs and therefore violates the notion of religious freedom.

With that in mind, let’s turn to the even more controversial topic of abortion. Catholic’s and conservatives have made it abundantly clear that they believe and that their religion states that life begins at conception, therefore making abortions murder. This is what their religion dictates.

However, there are other religions that do not share these views.

In simple terms, Islam allows abortions for married women up to about 120 days and allows it for victims of rape and incest as well if the woman’s life is in danger. The more complicated stance is that while it doesn’t openly condone it, the act is permitted if there is a legitimate excuse and the decision to get one is “the lesser of two evils”. There is a great divide within the Muslim community regarding abortions because of external factors relating to culture and sexuality and while some Muslim’s regard it as sin, the religion itself states that abortions under certain circumstances are permissible.

Judaism also allows abortions for serious reasons. For example, the religion considers the woman’s life as more important than the fetus’ and in the event of a threat to her life, a pregnancy may be terminated. The religion is more lenient within the first 40 days of pregnancy. There are people within the religion that have made their own interpretations and consider it wrong. However, officially, the religions stance is not entirely against it.

When I was in Lithuania a few years ago, I visited a nursery and I was told, “All these children are unwanted.” So I think it is better that that situation be stopped right from the beginning — birth control. Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance.

Between these 4 religions, neither has a staunchly anti-abortion stance. Though Protestants, Mormons, and Catholics are definitely the majority in the United States, the focus here is on the notion of religious freedom.

So with that, here is the crux of this post: Keeping religious freedom in mind, outlawing abortion serves to violate the freedom of religion of many Muslims,Hindus, Jews, and Buddhists. Protestant, Mormon, and Catholic anti-abortionists who seek to outlaw abortions based on their religious view of life beginning at conception are forcing their religious beliefs on millions of others who don’t necessarily hold the same religious views, not because they are atheists or agnostics, but because their religion does not believe that life begins at conception.

So does freedom of religion not apply to them in this case?

Why do the Catholics that are condemning the Obama Administration for violating their religious freedom not consider the religious freedom of others?

Stepping away from the aspect of abortion for a moment, Ryan Stevens, afellow Tumblr-er pointed out that Christians have, in recent years alone, repeatedly violated the notion of freedom of religion for others. This includes preventing the building of Mosques (there are too many such incidents for me to link just one) or “when an atheist rightly points out that her school, as a public institution, cannot endorse Christianity or hang religious paraphernalia in their school, they flip a shit and threaten her with violence, death, and eternal damnation.”

Is it that freedom of religion is important to them only if it applies to Christianity because ‘who cares about all those other people who don’t share the same beliefs as us’? If they’re going to bring religion into this and make freedom of religion the current focal point in war on contraception (and it definitely is a war) then perhaps they should actually stand by freedom of religion for all and not just Christians and Christian beliefs.

Disclaimer: This post was written by a Feministing Community user and does not necessarily reflect the views of any Feministing columnist, editor, or executive director.

This week, the New York Times published an article hand-wringing over declining fertility rates in America, which it blames over in part on access to birth control. Here’s the problem: it included a parenthetical falsely suggesting that using emergency contraception, like Plan B, causes abortion. Spoiler alert — it doesn’t.

For years, conservatives have baselessly claimed that emergency contraception causes abortions, often to fuel attacks on contraceptive access. When Plan B and other emergency contraceptives were first approved for sale in 1999, scientists didn’t fully understand how it worked. Anti-choice activists exploited that uncertainty, saying that emergency contraception prevents fertilized eggs from implanting in a ...

This week, the New York Times published an article hand-wringing over declining fertility rates in America, which it blames over in part on access to birth control. Here’s the problem: it included ...

After months of doing everything in its power to prevent several undocumented women from accessing abortion, news has broken that Trump’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) discussed “reversing” a young woman’s abortion using a procedure unsupported by science. The driving force behind the administration’s torture of traumatized young refugees seeking necessary reproductive care? Scott Lloyd, ORR director.

Lloyd oversees detained unaccompanied minors, yet has no experience in refugee resettlement and has a long history of promoting anti-woman rhetoric. He is clearly in this position because his anti-immigrant and anti-abortion agenda aligns with Trump.

Abortion “reversal” is not supported by science or the medical community. Anti-abortion extremists’ “reversal” procedure involves injecting the hormone progesterone into the pregnant person ...

After months of doing everything in its power to prevent several undocumented women from accessing abortion, news has broken that Trump’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) discussed “reversing” a young woman’s abortion using a procedure ...

We have a lot to celebrate today—but forty five years later, we’re still fighting to expand abortion access and protect reproductive freedom from right-wing attacks. Here’s some of our favorite writing on the site about abortion and reproductive justice.

Awful stories of unsafe pre-Roe abortions are a powerful reminder of the truth — a verifiable reality, despite the anti-choice movement’s instance otherwise — that, regardless of its legality, people will go ...

Hell yes: it’s Roe’s 45th anniversary, baby!

We have a lot to celebrate today—but forty five years later, we’re still fighting to expand abortion access and protect reproductive freedom ...

Search

We need your help!

Get Our Newsletter

New posts and Feministing news delivered to your inbox weekly!

Want to write for us?

All Feministing posts are written by the site’s collective of regular columnists and editors. Though we don’t currently accept guest submissions, we have an open platform Community site to which anyone can contribute. We often promote our favorite Community posts on the main site. And Community bloggers who consistently impress us may to be invited to become regular Feministing columnists..